Crystal meth, or “ice,” is the most damaging illegal drug in history. It demolishes whole communities, and it starts with a high so overwhelming and long lasting that many first-timers are hooked from the beginning.

Worse than its addictive qualities, it often causes permanent psychosis in users, leaving even the recovered addicts as mentally ill wards of the state.

In 2002 and 2003, community leaders saw that Hawai‘i was quickly becoming the ice capitol of the United States and wanted to do something. Enter Lt. Gov. Duke Aiona and the Legislature, each with totally different approaches.

The Legislature conducted hearings, heard from experts in law enforcement, drug prevention, mental health and treatment, and assembled a new public policy and funding regime that incorporated the best recommendations from the experts. They recognized that ice was not merely a law enforcement problem or a moral question, but a problem of public health.

They developed a rational, collaborative policy that they thought would work. They formed the Ice Task Force and after two years of public input, they developed a comprehensive package that included prevention, treatment and law enforcement.

In contrast, Aiona started with an “Ice Summit.” Flanked by the media, he announced that he would help to “map out strategies” that would work. So far, so good. Gathering input is a logical first step. The problem was that he had a preconceived notion of what law enforcement measures would do the trick and when nonprofit CEOs, agency leaders, academics and even former addicts tried to explain that this problem was more broad than simply being “tough on crime,” he chose not to listen.

Here’s a quote from his Web site: “The summit resulted in the creation of a comprehensive strategy to combat drug and alcohol use through community mobilization, prevention, treatment and law enforcement. As a result of new measures Lt. Gov. Aiona helped to put in place, the production and use of ice have dropped significantly in Hawai‘i.”

Here’s the problem with that claim. The Legislature’s Ice Task Force legislation was the result of two years worth of hearings and expert advice. But Lt. Gov. Aiona opposed it and Gov. Lingle vetoed it.  

Funding for prevention and treatment was delayed and decreased, and Aiona attacked the authors of the legislation for what he called “petty politics.”

Despite the efforts of the Lingle/Aiona administration to turn the ice epidemic into a political contest of who can be “tougher” on crime, Democrats quietly pressed forward with their three-fold agenda of interdiction, prevention and treatment. With the help of tens of millions of federal dollars from Sen. Daniel Inouye, more money for prevention was secured and the strategy appears to be working.

The data are not totally in yet, but the use of ice, according to law enforcement and drug treatment experts, is on the decline.

The problem with Duke Aiona’s approach on this issue is that it ignores one simple fact: Dopamine levels are at 12,000 percent of normal when a user is high on ice, and the crash is just as hard as the “high.” This means that no ice user is thinking about harsh penalties, the criminal justice system or anything else when he or she is pursuing the next hit .

Do we need tough laws? Yes, we certainly do. But we also need to be strategic — and the best strategy is to prevent people from trying ice in the first place and to help them find a way back to sobriety if they become addicts.

That’s the approach that Democratic leaders took in 2003, and thank goodness for all of us, it appears to be working.

• Brian Schatz is the chair of the Hawai‘i Democratic Party.